2004
DOI: 10.1016/j.rmed.2004.06.001
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The efficacy of smoking cessation strategies in people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: results from a systematic review

Abstract: Smoking cessation is the most effective way to reduce the risk of developing chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). It prevents or delays the development of airflow limitation and also reduces its progression. The objective of this study was to systematically review the effects of interventions for smoking cessation in people with COPD. Comprehensive searches of electronic and internet databases were carried out from 1966 to March 2002, using the Cochrane Airways Group search strategy. The reference lis… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
56
1
4

Year Published

2006
2006
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
4
2

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 89 publications
(63 citation statements)
references
References 31 publications
2
56
1
4
Order By: Relevance
“…In comparison to the previous 2 systematic reviews, 14,15 this review did not use the full Delphi list 17 to assess the quality of the studies. The Delphi list was developed as a minimum reference standard for randomized controlled trials on many different research topics, and, rather than replace, was intended to be used alongside other criteria lists.…”
Section: Methodological Quality Assessmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 4 more Smart Citations
“…In comparison to the previous 2 systematic reviews, 14,15 this review did not use the full Delphi list 17 to assess the quality of the studies. The Delphi list was developed as a minimum reference standard for randomized controlled trials on many different research topics, and, rather than replace, was intended to be used alongside other criteria lists.…”
Section: Methodological Quality Assessmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It was felt that the subject area of this review required an active role on the part of the subject in terms of behavioral support and a degree of control over their level of engagement with behavior change techniques. Consequently, it was decided that the elements of blinding of the care provider and the subject were not valid items, which, as Wagena et al 14 discussed, led to internal validity difficulties for their systematic review when comparing psychosocial interventions. To overcome this, a number of quality assessment points were added that also aimed to increase the validity of the studies selected.…”
Section: Methodological Quality Assessmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations